You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Please do not conflate FACT and OPINION
So when the broad consensus of opinion was that the sun moved around the earth, it would then make it true?
Einstein makes it clear that motion is relative to the observer.
Ptolemy's model is not "wrong", it simply uses a different reference point.
It would be like printing a map with East at the top instead of North.
It doesn't change the objective reality that the sun doesn't move around the earth.
You can conceptualize it in as many different ways as you like...
....the sun still doesn't revolves around the earth.
I'm all for intellectual exercises - but when denial of reality is necessary to continue the argument, it becomes moot, and enters the world of postmodernist delusions of reality.
imo.
The Earth and the Sun move relative to one another.
Which one moves around the other is a matter of perspective.
If you're searching for an example of an "objective fact" you're going to need to keep searching.
(1) If a person on a moving train bounces a ping-pong-ball on a table, the ball appears to move straight up and down.
(2) If a person standing along side the tracks and was watching the moving train could see the bouncing ping-pong-ball, it would appear to be moving in a parabolic wave pattern.
Which one of these observations is "objective fact"?
Have you ever heard of the scientific term "relativity"?
.....have you ever heard the term 'so far up your own intellectual arse, you can't see the wood for ego...baaah.
Please make your axioms explicit, enumerate your premises, and present an orderly and logically sound argument.
It's true that the bodies in this galaxy move relative to each other (actually following sacred geometric ratios that almost no-one seems to know about but which were all laid out in a tiny book a few years back). Without being able to define a 'true center' or true source for the universe that is fixed in location it is arguable that any body could be said to be the center. If you imagine the earth is static (as we essentially experience it on it's surface) then it isn't such a stretch to imagine that the sun moves around the earth (in fact that would be the most likely conclusion to make absent of any deep study). If you are on the sun somehow, then you could perhaps say the same there for the sun - where the earth could be said to be moving around the sun. I am not an expert in the history of perception of these things, but I wonder how much the idea that the earth circles the sun is based on the sun being considered older and more powerful.
I like the idea that we might subconsciously project the idea that the sun is "the boss" (older and more powerful, more influential, stronger gravity).
Thank you for your insightful comment.
My understanding is that the sun is yang energy (masculine and emitting), while the earth is yin (feminine and receptive) - I don't actually know (100%) which is older, though there has been a judgemental attitude which says that masculine is better than feminine since the very beginning.
Right, "masculine" (yang, "maker", "planner", "instigator") energy is often considered more "dangerous" (and that's often conflated with "more powerful") but on the other hand, you have KALI.
So, it's sort of a matter of perspective. "Order" versus "Chaos", which do you fear more?
Too much order, or too much chaos?
IMAGE SOURCE
the 'instigator' (good word) energy ultimately determines the outcome a lot of the time and since it began unconscious and thus also unloving, it has been responsible for all evil. the feminine has had to carry the results. that said, neither is really more powerful - it's just 'first mover advantage' in a sense.
too much order leads to stagnation and death. too much chaos at least has the potential to recover into balance.
balance is best :)
Well stated.